Previous daf

1)

(a) The source of Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, who learns that one may perform Milah on an Eved against his wishes, is the Pasuk "Kol Eved Ish Miknas Kesef u'Malta Oso, Oz Yochal Bo" (referring to the Korban Pesach). He learns from the words "Eved Ish" - that one may circumcise an Eved who is an Ish against his wishes, but not a son who is an Ish (i.e. the grown-up son whose father is converting) against his wishes.

(b) The problem with "Eved Ish" - lies in the implication that the Eved of a man needs Milah, but not the Eved of an Ishah. Why on earth should the Eved of a woman be any different than that of a man?

(c) Without the word "Ish" - the Pasuk would simply come to preclude someone who has an uncircumcised Eved from participating in the Korban Pesach.

(d) The Rabbanan, who maintain that an Eved Ish, like a Ben Ish, cannot be circumcised against his wishes, explain the Pasuk "Kol Eved Ish ... " like Shmuel - who Darshens that an Eved who *is under the domain of his master* (i.e. he has not been set free) is called an Eved, but not one who is *not*, from which he derives that an Eved, whose master has set him free, does not require a Get Shichrur.

(a) We have assumed until now that the Rabbanan require Kabalas Ol Mitzvos by an Eved Meshuchrar, because that is how they hold by Eishes Yefas To'ar. Rav Papa disagrees with this. In his opinion - it is only by an Eishes Yefas To'ar that the Rabbanan require Kabalas Mitzvos (and by the same token, her consent), because she was *not Chayav be'Mitzvos*; but when it comes to a regular Eved Meshuchrar, who *was*, they agree with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar (who does not require Kabalas Mitzvos).

(b) The Beraisa (in support of Rav Papa) says that both a Ger and an Eved that one buys from a Nochri require Kabalas Ol Mitzvos - but not an Eved that one buys from a Jew.

(c) The author of this Beraisa cannot be Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - because in his opinion, an Eved that one buys from a Nochri does not require Kabalas Ol Mitzvos either.

(d) Seeing as an Eved Meshuchrar does not require Kabalas Ol Mitzvos, even according to the Rabbanan, when the Beraisa (that we learned on the previous Amud) says 'Echad Ger ve'Echad Eved Meshuchrar' - it must be referring to the obligation to Tovel (to teach us that, although the Eved Toveled already when he became an Eved, he must Tovel again when he becomes a fully-fledged Jew.

(a) The Torah writes in Ki Seitzei "ve'Gilchah es Roshah ve'As'sah es Tzipornehah". Rebbi Eliezer interprets "ve'As'sah es Tzipornehah" to mean that she must cut her nails. According to Rebbi Akiva - it means that she must let her nails grow.

(b) Each one learns his opinion from the comparison to "ve'Gilchah es Roshah". According to ...

1. ... Rebbi Eliezer - it is comparing the cutting of the nails to the cutting of her hair.
2. ... Rebbi Akiva - it is comparing the uglification of letting her nails grow to that of cutting off all her hair.

(c) We prove Rebbi Eliezer's opinion from the Pasuk in Shmuel 2 "u'Mefivoshes ben Shaul Yarad Likras ha'Melech, Lo Asah Raglav ve'Lo Asah S'famav" - where we see that 'Asiyah' in this sort of context means cutting, and not letting grow.

4)

(a) According to Rebbi Eliezer, "u'Vachsah es Avihah ve'es Imah Yerach Yamim" means that she literally cries for her parents; according to Rebbi Akiva - that she cries for her idols (like the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "Omrim la'Eitz Avi Atah ... ").

(b) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa learns from this Pasuk that she cries for thirty days, after which she is permitted to him. According to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - "Yerach" means thirty days, "Yamim" means another thirty and "ve'Achar-Kein", a third set of thirty days, making a total of ninety days.

(c) Ravina asks on Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar that, according to his Derashah, it ought to be one hundred and twenty days - "Yerach", thirty; "Yamim", thirty and "ve'Achar-Kein", sixty.

(a) The Torah writes in Va'eschanan (regarding those who are obligated to keep Shabbos) "Le'ma'an Yanu'ach Avdecha ve'Amascha Kamocha", and in Mishpatim "ve'Yinafesh ben Amasecha ve'ha'Ger".

1. ... "ben Amasecha" - refers to an uncircumcised Eved.
2. ... "ve'ha'Ger" - to a Ger Toshav (who undertakes to relinquish his service of Avodah-Zarah), and Chilul Shabbos is compared to Avodah-Zarah.
3. ... "ve'Gercha Asher bi'Sh'arecha" (which precedes "Lema'an Yanu'ach") - to a Ger Tzedek.

(b) Rebbi Yishmael learns from "ben Amasecha" - that one is permitted to retain uncircumcised Avadim.

(c) According to Rebbi Akiva - "ben Amasecha" refers to an Eved that one bought just before dusk, and Shabbos entered before he was able to perform the B'ris Milah.

(a) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi says that if the Eved Kena'ani that someone bought from a Nochri refuses to perform the Milah - he may retain him for twelve months in the hope that he will change his mind. If he does not, then he must sell him back to a Nochri.

(b) The Rabbanan suggested to Rav Papa that Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi's statement does not conform with the opinion of Rebbi Akiva (who forbids the retaining of a slave who has not had B'ris Milah). He replied that ...

1. ... Rebbi Akiva speaks when the Eved refuses to accept to be circumcised from the very outset; whereas Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi speaks when initially, he agreed to circumcise, but then changed his mind - according to Rashi's Rebbe.
2. ... Rebbi Akiva speaks when the owner bought him S'tam (without any conditions); whereas Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi speaks when he stipulated at the time of purchase that he would only retain him for a year (should he refuse to circumcise), giving him the status of a hired worker (rather than of an Eved) - according to Rashi's own explanation.

(c) Rebbi Akiva explains "ben Amasecha" to refer to an Eved whom he bought Erev Shabbos just before dusk - because that is a perfectly valid explanation. He could equally well have established the Pasuk by 'Pasak'.

(d) Ravin quoting Rebbi Ilai, gives a third case of an Eved whom one may retain, and which Rav Papa again establishes even according to Rebbi Akiva - an Eved that he bought on the express condition that he would not circumcise him.

(a) Various Amora'im told the story of a town in Eretz Yisrael whose inhabitants purchased Avadim who refused to circumcise - and they retained them for twelve months, before selling them back to Nochrim, like the opinion of the Tana Kama of the Beraisa.

(b) Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar disagrees with the Tana Kama as far as Eretz Yisrael is concerned - because, bearing in mind that Chazal decreed Tum'as Zav on Nochrim, retaining uncircumcised Avadim for so long means that all the Terumos with which they come into contact will be rendered Tamei.

(c) Even the Tana Kama agrees with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar in the case of a border town - because we are afraid that the Eved will pass on secret information that he overhears to his friends across the border.

(a) According to Rebbi Chananyah the son of Raban Gamliel, Geirim are poor nowadays - because they did not observe their seven Mitzvos up to the time that they converted.

(b) Rebbi objected to that reason - because of the principle 'Ger she'Nisgayer, ke'Katan she'Nolad Dami' (so Hashem will not take into account what they did *before* they converted). He therefore gives the reason - because they are not careful in their performance of Mitzvos.

(c) Rebbi Elazar maintains that it is because they only serve Hashem out of fear of punishment, and not out of love. Acheirim (Rebbi Meir) says - it is because they postponed converting after having made the decision to do so.

(d) Rebbi Avahu (or Rebbi Chanina) brings a proof from the Pasuk in Rus "Yeshalem Hashem Pa'alech u'S'hi Maskurtech Sheleimah Asher Ba'as Lachsos Tachas Kenafav" - from which we see that Rus received her full reward for converting immediately and not delaying.